Steve Clifford's Hornets shifted over time from 3 point emphasis to ftas (with Howard). They were always somewhere in middle / middle low of pack on Moreyball. Not strong, not really weak.

What shot distribution design does Magic want / need? I haven't studied enough yet but if they go middle of road, they may get middle of road results. Magic last season were middle low on Moreyball. So maybe they stay that way. Stay tuned for perhaps more disclosure or clues.

Both in bottom third on team efg% at least last 2 years. Charlotte got worse, Orlando was trending better. So bringing a coach whose team shot worse... uh huh...

Clifford had the 2nd most used lineup in league... but it was the 3rd mildest performer of the league's 14 most used. It was the expected big name, big contract lineup. He had more success with a few lineups with one young wildcard no name. Probably want to stay open to that option. 6 of biggest minute 10 positive. A few moderate, one big. 408 total lineups used. That is probably below average. Less than 31% cumulative positive. That is probably a bit low too.

Celtics are probably highly rated for next season. I would probably agree but here is some partial analysis, that might take a contrarian tone. I dunno. I'm just going to gather some facts & arguments and see what I have.

In regular season they won 55 games. With seven 4 factor ratings in the middle from 11-20. The only excellent factor was #2 on efg% allowed. The previous season they were top 10 on 4 factors and bottom 10 on 3. So year to year they got a lot more average, improvement and slippage. Efg% ranking improved a little. They only improved by 1 net point and actual and expected wins only increased by a couple. The main narrative was how great they played despite the injuries but they didn't have Hayward either year and they did have Irving for 3/4ths of the regular season.

Which of the 7 middle range factors are they going to improve on with Hayward back and how much? For his career Hayward is mildly below average on efg%, though occasionally he was been above. Do people expect him to shoot better because of better teammates and lower usage? Whose minutes will he take- Morris and / or Smart? I dunno. His to% is pretty close to league and team average. He is a really awful offensive rebounder. He would get to line more than Smart or Morris.

His shot defense depends on position guarded and how he replaces. Same for forced turnovers and defensive rebounds. Fouls committed are average or maybe a bit lower.

What will the total impact be? Hayward maybe doesn't replace Smart or Morris directly but will take minutes and have others shuffle where they play. Offense might improve some (most likely getting to line- if Hayward gets the ball from Harden / Paul?) , the defensive likely to stay same or slip. Assuming some of Hayward's ORPM is usage contingent, the offensive improvement might be less than often expected. With rest of team, who improves / declines and on what factors? That will take sone more research. The first thing I'll say (repeat) is remember how little the Celtics changed overall from previous season to this one. Horford, I see no reason to expect improvement, except maybe on turnovers. Turning 32, slippage is more likely on rebounds, shooting and getting to line. Maybe shot defense or fouls, though I am less concerned there. Jaylen Brown's main boxscore change yr to yr was quantity of 3 ptas and efg%. His RPM improved dramatically. Will he improve from here? I'd say maintaining things are more likely than further improvements. Similar bottom with Rozier and Tatum in my first take. Smart, I see no more reason to expect improvement, especially as his minutes decline if he stays. I don't think he stays. If he leaves, team offense may see a small bump up while team defense may see a moderate or bigger decline. On Baynes, the boxscore decline has already started. The RPM stayed the same. Either he stays same or declines but won't matter that much. Morris, probably similar. Irving? I dunno. I doubt he gets better than last season, except maybe on minutes. If Boston is to get better, he will have to play more at same level or better. Tatum? I think he might have just moved to his level right away. Maybe he improves but if his role is same or less there may be offsetting effects.

I'll stop here for moment. My general conclusion is they may not improve that much overall. Probably won't be big improvement.

Imo, it would not be wise for Celtics to stand pat and assume Hayward and Irving make them titlists or top title contenders. It may be hard to repeat this level of playoff success without major improvements. This was a regular season team with one factor strength. A near average team with great shot defense... does that sound like the right profile to win a title? I'd say no, not close. They need more Moreyball, better efg% and ts%. More game command over nifty late game moves.

Cavs may or may not be a top east contender next season. Raptors probably will be or at least look like it til proven otherwise. Pacers & Sixers. Bucks maybe. Not sure if any other eastern team belongs in first tier. That should make for a competitive playoffs. Probably better than this year.

Somebody who analyzes shot defense, how great was Celtics shot defense compared to expected results? How much do you say was luck? Average amount or more?

Celtics allowed .989 points per shot in the regular season. If every player shot their career average from the shot location they should have given up 1.01 points per shot for a league best difference of 0.022 (76ers had second best difference at 0.011). Keep in mind that these numbers completely ignore defense.

Some other things to note on their shot defense:
They gave up the 5th fewest corner three attempts (444, league average 532, best 415 - nets, worst 642 knicks)
They gave up the lowest % of opponent shots from the corners (19.55%, league average 22.3%, worst Nuggets 26.2%)
They gave up the 5th fewest above the break 3 attempts within 27 feet (1432, avg - 1549, best 1119 - Bucks, worst 1852 - Bulls)
They gave up the 6th lowest % of opponents shots from within 27 feet above the break (63%, avg 65%, best 50% - Bucks, worst 69% - Bulls)
They gave up the 4th most 3s beyond 27 feet (394, league average 296, most 600 - Pacers, least 165 - Nuggest)
They gave up the 4th highest % of opponents shots from beyond 27 feet (17%, league average 12%, highest Bucks - 26.7%, lowest 6.6% - Hawks)
They gave up the 9th fewest three point attempts (2270, league average 2377, fewest 2009 - Nets, most 2678 - Bulls)

Semi Ojeleye played 1150 minutes - I'd see all of those going to Hayward
Rozier played 2068, smart played 1614, baynes played 1485, Monroe played 496, Larkin played 775 and Nader played 522.

I could see the Baynes minutes decreasing due to more 3 wing lineups and less 2 big lineups.
I could also see Monroe, Larkin and Nader minutes being redistributed to keep Rozier and Smart playing bringing Hayward closer to 2000-2200 minutes

Do you assume Celtics results include beneficial luck and do you expect (on average) some regression to the mean next season? How strong was their actual vs. expected shot defense last season?

I think there is a reason why they have been one of the best 3pt D teams the entire time Stevens has been in Boston. I do think they benefit from some luck, but at this point the sample is pretty large.